Vestigiality.

[nerdvincent]

I was wondering is creationists could explain vestigiality.
Vermiform appendix on human, undevelopped hind leg on whales... somebody got a non-evolutionist theory?

Discuss.

[nerdvincent]

Oops. Please mods move this to science and tech. or philosophy and religion.

My mistake.

[ShadowFox]

I got a few others too: wisdom teeth, Ostrich Wings

[nerdvincent]

It is well known that wisdom teeth are there to punish the sinning wise people. Those who are clever enough to disagree with biblical creationism.

[loser]

I was wondering is creationists could explain vestigiality

Of course. The word is a misnomer and 'vestigial' organs are not what scientists assume them to be. Instead of being leftover or remnant organs which are no longer needed (degenerate organs), they are actually vital components of the bio-diversity capabilities of carbon-based life. Just like a blank of steel can be fashioned into myriad shapes and functionalities, so too can 'vestigial organs': they can develop into a needed tail for a lizard or into a tailbone (sans tail) for a human...or even into a plethora of other kinds of tails, as individually needed. Just like the alphabet of 26 letters that we use to communicate can be fashioned into an almost infinite set of possibilites, so too can these so-called vestigial organs.

They are very much needed in the construction of the infinite arrays that make life as we know it capable.

It is well knmown that wisdom teeth are there to punish the sining wises.

I think it's safe to say that you meant 'known' and 'sinning' in the italicized words above but I am sorry I just can't decipher "wises". Whatever are you trying to say?

"Clever" won't get it...

[SoylentGreen]

[b]loser[/B ]they are actually vital components of the bio-diversity capabilities of carbon-based life

.

You mean they can evolve, as in evolution?

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: nerdvincent I was wondering is creationists could explain vestigiality. Vermiform appendix on human, undevelopped hind leg on whales... somebody got a non-evolutionist theory? Discuss.

What's so wrong with remaining signs of evolution. Good design, not enough time has yet passed for some of these traits to vanish.

[Technosoul]

Wisdom teeth might have become less needed after people started cooking food.

The addition or substraction of foods from the diet, due to migration, might also play a role.

Needless to say if an animal adopted to living in the ocean instead in the wetlands then it would not make use of feet any more, hard to walk on water, and so what you don't use you loose.

Animals often re-design to fit the environment where as humans re-designed the environment to fit their self.

A number of factors can have a role as "coredesigners". co-re -designers.

Needless to say genetics would also be involved.

What is mostly lacking in the study of evolution is the role that consicousness might play as a co-designer of change.

Factors such as yearning, desire, (aka prayer), or even logic, as an off-shoot reaction to threats or advantages, which would segway out of fear, greed, or anger.

A yearning that would call upon the divine compassion of the great spirit to reprogram the DNA so that change can take place in a progressive manner through the genes passed down from generation to generation.

If that is the case, then evolution would support the claim that prayer can work wonders, this unceasing yearning for self-improvement or for an the advantages of a different environment. (land to sea, sea to land - etc.)

[Zhavric]

Quote by: loser Of course. The word is a misnomer and 'vestigial' organs are not what scientists assume them to be. Instead of being leftover or remnant organs which are no longer needed (degenerate organs), they are actually vital components of the bio-diversity capabilities of carbon-based life. Just like a blank of steel can be fashioned into myriad shapes and functionalities, so too can 'vestigial organs': they can develop into a needed tail for a lizard or into a tailbone (sans tail) for a human...or even into a plethora of other kinds of tails, as individually needed. Just like the alphabet of 26 letters that we use to communicate can be fashioned into an almost infinite set of possibilites, so too can these so-called vestigial organs.

Prove it.

We're all quite tired of your asinine claims that never carry with them a shred of evidence.

[gallo]

Quote by: Halofan48 I got a few others too: wisdom teeth, Ostrich Wings

Actually, wisdom teeth are quite suitable for chewing if they do not become impacted. They aren't really vestigial.

Ostrich wings are a good example. They are no longer used for flight but balance when running. As is typical of vestigial organs, the ostrich wings have been coopted for another purpose.

[ShadowFox]

Good point

[tivodan1116]

I don't understand the creationist's argument for vestigal organs...

So, what, God was bored? He was uncreative and decided to just leave the useless junk in there?

He thought men looked better with nipples?

[gallo]

Quote by: loser Of course. The word is a misnomer and 'vestigial' organs are not what scientists assume them to be.

What exactly do you think that scientists assume them to be? Clearly, from your following discussion, you actually have no idea.

Instead of being leftover or remnant organs which are no longer needed (degenerate organs),

Is that what you think a vestigial organ is?

they are actually vital components of the bio-diversity capabilities of carbon-based life.

How does that mean that they are not vestigial? In fact, most vestigial structures are not "vital components" of anything. Take the human appendix, for example. It no longer has a digestive function. It may now function as a reservoir for digestive microbes.

Just like a blank of steel can be fashioned into myriad shapes and functionalities, so too can 'vestigial organs': they can develop into a needed tail for a lizard or into a tailbone (sans tail) for a human...or even into a plethora of other kinds of tails, as individually needed. Just like the alphabet of 26 letters that we use to communicate can be fashioned into an almost infinite set of possibilites [sic], so too can these so-called vestigial organs.

So you are saying that organs can evolve and lose their original function and take on other, unrelated functions? Imagine that.

They are very much needed in the construction of the infinite arrays that make life as we know it capable.

Be specific. Give some examples. Do you actually need your appendix? Other examples?

[Lullaby Chainer]

One of my ex's broke up with me by saying her heart was a vestigial organ. :-(

Click for top 10 Useless Limbs..

[gallo]

Quote by: tivodan1116 I don't understand the creationist's argument for vestigal organs... So, what, God was bored? He was uncreative and decided to just leave the useless junk in there?

The creationist argument is that vestigial structures actually have a function. That means that their god must have designed it that way. For example, the human appendix no longer has any function in digestion, but creationists are quite fond of pointing out that it has a very minor role in the immune system. Thus, it isn't useless, and therefore god designed it that way. In effect, the claim is that it never did have a role in digestion. The problem is, the role of the appendix in the immune system is exactly the same as the rest of the bowel. Recently, some scientists have claimed that the appendix serves as a reservoir for digestive microbes. But neither of these functions make the appendix essential. Believe me, you can get along just fine without it, and are, in fact more likely to survive longer without it.

Note that most vestigial structures still have a function, although it may be unrelated to that of homologous structures in other organisms.

[grandpa]

Quote by: gallo The creationist argument is that vestigial structures actually have a function. That means that their god must have designed it that way.

What function? That they're parts of a structure, perhaps?

Grandpa h.

[gallo]

Quote by: grandpa What function? That they're parts of a structure, perhaps?

Why did you stop reading after the first two sentences? There was more to the post.

[loser]

What is mostly lacking in the study of evolution is the role that consicousness might play as a co-designer of change. Factors such as yearning, desire, (aka prayer), or even logic, as an off-shoot reaction to threats or advantages, which would segway out of fear, greed, or anger. A yearning that would call upon the divine compassion of the great spirit to reprogram the DNA so that change can take place in a progressive manner through the genes passed down from generation to generation. If that is the case, then evolution would support the claim that prayer can work wonders, this unceasing yearning for self-improvement or for an the advantages of a different environment. (land to sea, sea to land - etc.)

You're very close to the truth, IMO. I strongly believe that genetic changes are constant and they are affected by all stimuli, including emotions and things 'spiritual' by nature. Thus, faith can effect changes through the immune system. In fact, I believe that these energies (expressed as determination, drive, resolve, etc.) can even affect events outside our normal sphere of influence...i.e., the weather, someone's decision, etc. Life is full of invisible machinations that affect us daily of which we are completely unaware.

Prove it. We're all quite tired of your asinine claims that never carry with them a shred of evidence.

Where would we be without theories?

Ostrich wings are a good example. They are no longer used for flight but balance when running. As is typical of vestigial organs, the ostrich wings have been coopted for another purpose.

I've seen people that are so fat that they can't get out of bed and they definitely can't walk. Even still, I wouldn't call their legs vestigial. The same is true for people who are paralyzed.

The ostrich's wings were for flight. Just because he can't fly anymore doesn't make his wings vestigial.

He was uncreative and decided to just leave the useless junk in there?

Are you talking about your brain? I'm sure that it is not total junk...surely someday you will find a use for it. Remember, just because you have not discovered a use for something does not make it useless.

He thought men looked better with nipples?

Maybe He thought that he might want to nurse one day...

Quote: Quote by: loser Of course. The word is a misnomer and 'vestigial' organs are not what scientists assume them to be. What exactly do you think that scientists assume them to be? Clearly, from your following discussion, you actually have no idea. Quote: Instead of being leftover or remnant organs which are no longer needed (degenerate organs), Is that what you think a vestigial organ is?

http://http://www.answers.com/topic/...initiator=CANS

Medical Dictionary: ves·tig·i·al
(vĕ-stĭj'ē-əl, -stĭj'əl)
adj.
Occurring or persisting as a rudimentary or degenerate structure.

I have lots of ideas, don't ever doubt it...

Take the human appendix, for example. It no longer has a digestive function. It may now function as a reservoir for digestive microbes.

You are wrong...it is still very functional, just like the tonsils.

So you are saying that organs can evolve and lose their original function and take on other, unrelated functions? Imagine that.

No, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that the design is such that one rudimentary organ can develop into several different organs, as needed.

The ToE has got your thinking contained. You need to step outside the box and learn to think for yourself.

Be specific. Give some examples. Do you actually need your appendix? Other examples?

I need mine.

Of course, I really don't need my legs anymore...
...but I think I'll try to keep them just the same.

The creationist argument is that vestigial structures actually have a function. That means that their god must have designed it that way. For example, the human appendix no longer has any function in digestion, but creationists are quite fond of pointing out that it has a very minor role in the immune system. Thus, it isn't useless, and therefore god designed it that way. In effect, the claim is that it never did have a role in digestion. The problem is, the role of the appendix in the immune system is exactly the same as the rest of the bowel. Recently, some scientists have claimed that the appendix serves as a reservoir for digestive microbes. But neither of these functions make the appendix essential. Believe me, you can get along just fine without it, and are, in fact more likely to survive longer without it. Note that most vestigial structures still have a function, although it may be unrelated to that of homologous structures in other organisms.

Essential?

Guess what?

Eyes, arms, legs, feet, fingers, ears, nose (ask MJ)...none of these are essential...you can get along just fine without them. Vestigial? I think not.

Your tonsils have a purpose and are needed.

Your appendix has a purpose and is needed.

Your wisdom teeth have a purpose and are needed.

Scientists have no purpose and aren't needed.

You might say that they are vestigial.

It seems to me (after reading these posts) that the main vestigial organ in man is the brain...it seems to serve no purpose whatsoever.

[Piscean]

My wisdom teeth fit fine in my mouth. I dont see them as relevant. Maybe eating cooked food and living more sedentary lives has caused a lessening of the teeth needed for most or something. To me thats just adaptation like pigment changes in the skin. Sure doesnt make me thing my great great great grandpa squared was a monkey, or a slug, or a rat, or any of the other genetically similar creatures on earth.

[Piscean]

Your tonsils have a purpose and are needed. Your appendix has a purpose and is needed. Your wisdom teeth have a purpose and are needed.

Ya and it's funny how, until science proves the need for these things, man just cuts them out and throws them away. To me that explains scientists and science followers in general." If i can't prove it's use with my little limited equipment and my own little limited mind, I'll just declare it irrelevant or useless" People who use science as a reason to not believe in God are like a kid with a magnifying glass who only believes in what he can see magnified through his little magnifying glass. He looks at little details up close and then gives theories on the big picture without even stepping back and looking at the bigger picture right in front of him. Do people really think that science has discovered 1% of 1% of 1% of 1% of a fraction of what there is to know? And yet you wanna make a belief system out of it. I can't really think of anything more foolish off the top of my head!